You mean this? It’s *stellar* and factual. Probably helped save many lives by putting together existing research in such a clear manner. There is misinformation by nonexperts but also amazing empirical stuff being compiled by people with requisite skills.https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca …
The article is solid. There has been a dearth of solid information from the sources you would expect. Late Feb, I ended up writing an article explaining why we need to flatten the curve. I’m not an epidemiologist, I just know some sociology of pandemics.https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/preparing-for-coronavirus-to-strike-the-u-s/ …
-
-
I didn’t write it because I was out of things to write. It was urgently needed and I couldn’t find something like that to share with people. (The dean of public health at my university and many public health folks have since praised it but at the time I was weird for me.)
-
One of the reasons we are so late is that the needed guidance and explanations weren’t there in accessible form. Tweets don’t count. There was an alarming number of stop panicking articles from traditional otherwise trustworthy media, too! Last weeks more people stepped up.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You are uninformed. The 3.4% CFR came from the head of WHO. The article does a great job explaining why the fatality rate varies. I get you mean well, but you are not informed enough to judge what's misinformation. It's a tough time. Those articles are informed, you are not.
- Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.